Programme Outcomes Assessment Models in Engineering Faculties
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Malaysia is currently a member of Washington Accord which recognises substantial equivalence in the accreditation of qualifications for engineering programme among member countries. Under this agreement, assessment of programme outcomes (PO) is now mandatory for all engineering programmes in Malaysia. However, the typical PO assessment model practised by many engineering programmes resulted in vague assessment methods and as a result failed to show concrete continual quality improvement (CQI). The major issues with the model are with regard to the aspect of unclear performance criteria, grades as measurement indicators, lack of evidence, detached used of indirect methods and unclear CQI. A new model which is more holistic and based on looking at each PO as a major thrust with specific performance criteria is proposed. It is expected that the new model will allow one to objectively evaluate whether the students have achieved the criteria, subsequently facilitating CQI implementation within the programme and produced quality engineering graduates.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it